The Rattlesnake Island Saga, Part 4

An 1874 Patent (Ownership and use of land) in the Sulfur Bank area at the southern end of Clear Lake, was issued to Fred Billings and a second person, named in the records, S.F. Butterworth. Then for eighty years nothing much happened until, in a ‘Quiet Action’ by the U.S. Government (a new hearing to determine title of the lands) claims to the property surfaced like flies to honey. For the first time, in nearly a century, Butterworth, Billings, plus an army of John and Jane Does were listed as defendants to the Quiet Action (and the property). Here is where the confusion appears; in no place in the original description of land ownership was Rattlesnake Island included specifically.

The first known and recorded patent issued for Rattlesnake Island was in 1877. California gave Thomas Madden and Richard Floyd (Chapter 22, The Star Gazer) three islands in Clear Lake. In a glaring (and highly suspect) omission, the California Legislature made no mention of aboriginal rights. Neither did they admit that anyone was living on the island.

That fact is significant. Because of prior Supreme Court rulings; Only Congress and not any state may transfer such title. Even more interesting is this fact; Governor William Irwin of California used a reference to three acts of Congress, which, he said, gave him the authority to issue those grants.

At the time of this writing I was not able to find the three Congressional acts, or the parts, which the writer of Governor Irwin used for his ‘authority’ to transfer title of Indian land to private White owners. I suspect, because of Congress’ clear order that ‘Only Congress and not any state may transfer such title’, such an interpretation, whatever Irwin maintained, would not have cut the cheese or been legal.

1934: This law also gave the Indians a way to govern themselves and opened the way to assist the Native Americans to take back the land that had been taken from them.

Rattlesnake Island, with its ownership as cloudy as a London fog, became a ‘football’ during the two-decade period of 1930-1950. The Native American’s cause was taken up by the U.S. Government. Indian policies, enacted during those two decades, shook up the Indian’s status worse than a shaker cocktail. The results were a host of confusing and opposing policies and these confusing policies affected especially Rattlesnake

Island’s status.

1939-1941: District Court case number 4068L tried to settle the ownership status of Rattlesnake Island the mainland portion of land where the Elem community lived. Then came World War II to sidetrack everything. What followed truncated ruling, 4068L, was a tidal wave of plundering, laying waste, and unlawful seizing Indian lands. Finally, seeing the confusion, In 1941, Congress was finally moved to do ‘something’. It reasserted once again in strong language that, Congress alone, had the power to allow the sale or the exchange of Indian property (314 U.S. 339, 1941).

1946: Congress made an effort to make the sale of Indian land more difficult. They passed the Indian Claims Commission Act. The Act created a Commission to hear and decide on Indian disputes with the White man and the 1946 Act gave the Indians new hope.

Before the commission was terminated in 1972, many cases were heard where Indian property had been sold to whites without Congressional approval. Even so, the Indian Claims Commission Act remained to continue to serve the Native Americans. It guaranteed Indian claims to land would be heard and adjudicated (28 USCA 1505 Para. 24 1992).

1947: The Rattlesnake Island case never went to trial until 1947. It was a non-jury trial and the Government presented arguments for the claim of federal trust of that property. By that time, twelve years after the initiation of the case (District. Court. Case 4068L), it was clouded again by the later anti-trust legislation. The final judgment was entered into the books in 1949 and, in the end, the government lost.

How they lost is intriguing. By this writer’s thinking, it was illegal and based on Findings of Fact that were, on their face, absolutely wrong and at odds with the truth.

The court found:

1) That land island had never been claimed, used, occupied, cultivated, improved, enjoyed, or owned by the Pomo or any other Indian tribes.

2) No Indians have ever cleared the land, built fences, barns, lodges, houses, ceremonial halls, or other improvement on said land island.

3) That property has never been used as a burying place for Native American dead.

This writer believes the Court was wrong.

Next week: An Open Question.